| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Apologies if this has been answered before, but can a gunslinger choose a double barrelled pistol as their starting weapon?
Chapter and verse appreciated as player requires it.
Thank you!
A Gnome Experimental Gunsmith can add the extra barrel to his/her starting firearm. Other than that no.
|
A pistol is a specific type of firearm, and a double barreled pistol is a different, distinct, type of firearm. The only weapons you can start with are a blunderbuss, musket, or pistol, so you cannot choose a double-barreled pistol as your starting weapon.
A pistol is a specific type of firearm, and a double barreled pistol is a different, distinct, type of firearm. The only weapons you can start with are a blunderbuss, musket, or pistol, so you cannot choose a double-barreled pistol as your starting weapon.
The confusion comes from the PRD table of Early Firearms which you kindly referenced, they are defined as pistol first with a type afterward i.e. pistol, dragon, they are all pistols.
Apologies to question your wisdom but two of my players only see things in black or white and there is still too much grey to be definitive for them both.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Chapter and verse appreciated as player requires it.
Apologies to question your wisdom but two of my players only see things in black or white and there is still too much grey to be definitive for them both.
There will be no chapter and verse. You cannot prove a negative. If your players only see in black and white, tell them that it's your game, and the rules are as stated: "blunderbuss, musket, or pistol".
It's their job to prove their view is correct, not your job to prove that they are incorrect.
I'd say if your characters by some course or other have enough starting gold to afford the upgrades then I'd allow it. Granted they would have to buy off the battered condition that it starts with first =).
|
|
A pistol is one type of firearm. A Coat Pistol, Dragon Pistol, Double-Barreled Pistol, etc. are separate and distinct firearms.
Note that this distinction is even made earlier on the same page:
"Even though the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (firearms) feat grants you proficiency with all firearms, anytime you take a feat that modifies a single type of weapon (such as Weapon Focus or Rapid Reload), you must still pick one specific type of firearm (such as musket, axe musket, blunderbuss, pistol, or double pistol)" for that feat to affect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There will be no chapter and verse. You cannot prove a negative.
Huh? What the heck does that mean, what's the point of a rules forum if you are not going discuss the rules and just impose your world view onto people, because you’re always right, right?
With some of my players, this is not an issue at all and what I decide goes with no problems. I am not willing to discuss my other player’s difficulties, suffice to say, that I am not able or willing to make that kind of unilateral decision with them.
It's their job to prove their view is correct, not your job to prove that they are incorrect.
Their view is correct, Pistol is a generic term for a multitude of firearms, no one says "oh pass me that single barrelled pistol", and I understand that the intent may have been different, but it was poorly written.
My player mentioned he may like to play a gunslinger in a society game hence the questions now, before he sits down with someone that does not know him.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Their view is correct, Pistol is a generic term for a multitude of firearms, no one says "oh pass me that single barrelled pistol", and I understand that the intent may have been different, but it was poorly written.
My player mentioned he may like to play a gunslinger in a society game hence the questions now, before he sits down with someone that does not know him.
I can understand how in a letter-of-the-law type of setting such as PFS, the actual verbiage of a rules clause is highly important.
That being said, I think the key to understanding the distinction is that the class of weapons isn't "Pistol," but rather "one-handed firearm." See the Pistolero archetype for an example of this classification in action.
"Pistol" would be a specific one-handed firearm. Also note that the other examples listed under the rule entry (Blunderbuss, Musket) aren't groups of weapons either. It wouldn't make any sense for the listing to reference Specific Gun, Group of Guns, Specific Gun.
This is very similar to some shenanigans that said gunslinger player is going to encounter later on, where having Rapid Reload (Pistol) doesn't avail him in reloading a double-barreled pistol. He'd need Rapid Reload (Double-Barreled pistol).
|
|
Their view is correct, Pistol is a generic term for a multitude of firearms...
In real life yes. But in the terms of game mechanics, which is what we are discussing, there is no weapons category for "Pistols". A Pistol is a singular and distinct type of firearm, just like a Coat Pistol, Dragon Pistol, Double-Barreled Pistol, etc. are separate and distinct firearms.
Note that this distinction is even made earlier on the same page:"Even though the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (firearms) feat grants you proficiency with all firearms, anytime you take a feat that modifies a single type of weapon (such as Weapon Focus or Rapid Reload), you must still pick one specific type of firearm (such as musket, axe musket, blunderbuss, pistol, or double pistol)" for that feat to affect.
Notice how they make it clear that there is a distinct difference between a musket and an axe musket, or a pistol and a double pistol as far as the way the weapons interact with feats and abilities.
Thanks Doctor Kash and Ssalarn for your replies and I agree with your comments on the feats and abilities which are clearly written.
I come from a broad gaming background, as do my players, and tend to think rules more in terms of collectable card games or board games, where they often define tags/traits/types by keywords, in this case Pistol is the keyword in the same way Fire is a keyword in a lot of spells and effects.
I can see from your "in real life" and "letter-of-the-law" comments that you both get my point of view and I appreciate the debate, Thank you.